What to make of the war of words that has erupted between Jonathan Jansen and Jessie Duarte? Briefly, ANC spokesperson Duarte is demanding that recently installed University of the Free State Rector Jonathan Jansen apologise for calling Basic Education Minister Angie Motshekga a “lazy and incompetent minister, if one takes into account her record as MEC in Gauteng”. In an open letter to Jansen, Duarte fires back:
“In our society, we have learned the hard way through the misogynistic approach of the highly educated academics that acclaimed Apartheid never existed. It appears that Jonathan Jansen belongs to this ilk. He has insulted the Minister of Basic Education in a manner reminiscent of the utterances made by the Apartheid ideologues of the old order. How often did we not hear, African people in particular being described as ‘lazy and stupid’ by well educated professors with internationally recognized credentials? This is a description illustrative of ignorance and prejudice.”
It is worth noting here the irony (some might say double-standard). The ANC believes Jansen should apologize for expressing his “misogynistic”, “ignorant” and “prejudiced” view that Motshekga is lazy and incompetent when the ANC did not ask (let alone demand) that Motshekga apologise for her comments that COPE defectors Terror Lekota and Mluleki George are dogs: “Now that the dogs are leaving, there will be peace and we will be stronger. The dogs arrived in the ANC and they have left.” It’s open to debate which kind of name-calling is worse or when exactly personal opinion slides into personal insult.
More importantly, Duarte’s open letter situates Jansen’s “lazy and incompetent” comment in the racist colonial and apartheid discourse of ‘lazy and stupid natives’. This is quite easy, given last year’s infamous exposé of the UFS’s Reitz men’s hostel (which has since been closed), one of many sites in this country where the long history of racist discourse still finds praxis. The association of this discourse with “well educated professors with internationally recognized credentials” also has a ring of truth about it. Duarte presumably has the likes of Charles Templeman Loram in mind, whose book The Education of the South African Native, published in 1917, was based on his doctoral dissertation at Columbia University:
“… many of our criticisms of the Native as lazy, stupid, unteachable are due to the failure to comprehend his outlook on life. We have failed to realize that the Native does not feel the need for such virtues as punctuality, application, and thoroughness, which are essential to success in our European sense of the word” (p.8).
But just because it’s easy, doesn’t mean it’s accurate. There are a few things going on which I think merit closer attention.
Firstly, Duarte strategy to deflect Jansen’s comments on commitment and competence draws attention to a key issue in the national debate about governance: How much of a factor is demonstrated commitment and proven competence in selecting candidates for top government positions? Or to put it another way, to what extent does demonstrated loyalty to the new powers at Luthuli House outweigh ability and competence in making cabinet appointments? This is a key issue that runs through much recent political controversy in the post-Mbeki era, and if widespread anxiety about the possible appointment of Judge Hlophe to the Constitutional Court is to be believed, it appears now to be overflowing into the judiciary too (though it’s worth noting that Hlophe has not done much to earn Zuma’s reward). But Duarte’s deflections draw attention to this issue on her own account, not on Jansen’s, because I don’t think this is Jansen’s primary focus. This brings us to the second issue, which is the depth of the government’s commitment to improving education. This I think is Jansen’s real concern and his record of publications, both academic and in the popular press, bears this out.
But Jansen shoots from the hip and he has previously targeted the ANC; they are afterall the governing party, with all the responsibilities that entails: Take for example his article Vital Questions for Politicians. Noting that, “Nothing dismays me more than politicians promising things when they know they have neither the will nor the capacity to deliver,” he poses his first question:
“What will your party do if an MEC for education in one of the provinces shows blatant disregard for a scheduled meeting of the minister of education to discuss the opening of the school year, and trots off to attend the court proceedings for the president of her political party?”
The MEC who prompted this question was Angie Matshekga who skipped class to be at one of Zuma’s court appearances. (Read the ANC’s mostly-spin reply here)
More shooting from the hip is Jansen’s article “Long leave, comrades, long leave” which consists of a mocking satirical dialogue in “Sadtu’s political education class 101”:
Cde Justice: “Sorry comrades, I don’t understand. Must we not choose the most competent people for the job, those who can deliver on the needs of the poor?”
Lem: “Listen, you fool, political positions are not about competence! How do you think Comrade Manto kept her job and Comrade Angie got hers? You do not have to be competent; in fact, you do not even have to go to the meetings of senior Cabinet ministers in your portfolio. All you need to do is show up at the right funerals and at the right courts and, before you can say deployment, you’re high up on the party list. Competence is a bourgeoisie word, remember. So go out there and wreck some township schools!”
Provocative stuff perhaps, but off the mark? Depends what you’re aiming at …
Jansen has a proven track record in education and his cv is very impressive. It is also significant that he is black, which makes him the first black rector in the UFS’s 105 year history (hence Duarte doesn’t outright accuse him of racism). Thankfully Jansen doesn’t appear to share Xolela Mangcu’s inclination towards self-promotion, but like most of the ‘public intellectuals’ who fill our newspapers with their insight and opinion, Jansen cannot be faulted for lack of commitment nor indeed for lack of insight. Regrettably, it seems the ANC, as governing party, can, which is exactly what Jansen’s consistent critique has aimed at.
So we should understand Jansen’s frustration with Matshekga’s appointment to head-up the newly created Ministry of Basic Education, a portfolio that will require considerable commitment, hard work, management and leadership to get functioning within the government’s broad policy framework. A M&G report that Matshekga, who is also the ANCWL President, was “unimpressive” as Gauteng MEC for Education is not comforting: “Once a leading education department, Gauteng has slipped and seems unable to contain the growing education crisis, particularly in township schools.” (Questions have also been raised about Matshekga’s failures to disclose company directorships in compliance with the provincial legislature’s regulations.)
Which raises another of Jansen’s Questions to Politicians:
“Given the acknowledged failure to deliver in the provinces on noble policies at the national level, would you appoint people to critical positions on the basis of their loyalty to the party, or on the basis of their competence?”
To this one the ANC replied: “The ANC believes that appointments should be based on competence and proven ability to execute.”
The reply continues:
“This is why we have paid increased attention to teacher development, the review of district offices and their effectiveness, and evaluation (with deans of education faculties) of initial teacher education in our universities. Further, the ANC has supported plans to upgrade teacher qualifications through the provision of bursaries. The ANC has also agreed to the establishment of a National Evaluation and Education Development Unit to review and audit education provision and quality on a regular basis. Such a unit will also have a remit to focus on skills and competence in schools, districts and provincial departments.” (emphasis mine)
All of which are noble statements of intent and commitments at the national level -which won’t be followed through unless critical positions like national minister are appointed based on competence and proven ability to execute.
Duarte’s reframing of Jansen’s critique as complicit with misogyny and the discourse on ‘lazy and incompetent natives’, by obfuscating the difference between incompetence and racist/sexist prejudice, resituates the critique from a concern with capability and capacity to discrimination. Thus Duarte establishes a false choice, as President Obama would say, between meritocracy and accountability on the one hand, and prejudice and discrimination on the other, as if aspiring to the former means sacrificing our national commitment to combating the latter. Sadly, the ANC perpetuates this false dichotomy as a quick and effective means to neutralize criticism. It does a disservice to itself, our history and our future.
But increasingly this strategy is less persuasive. Partly this is because the critique emanates from black intellectuals and professionals. They are harder to pin as racists than their white counterparts, and thus we increasingly see references to their supposed elitism and distance from the grass roots, which has the knock-on effect of giving currency to poor education and proximity to ‘the masses’, as we have seen with the rise of Julius Malema (recall his triumphalist performance at UCT on the eve of the election). But more importantly, and more sadly, the fallacity is shown up by poor pass rates, deteriorating teacher morale, and school violence, all indicators of incompetence and poor leadership, despite notable policies designed to address these challenges.
Popularity: 20% [?]
July 22nd, 2009 at 8:08 pm
It is easy to pick on intellectuals and the opposition in parliament and other such counter revolutionaries. But for Ms Jessie Duarte to say to Jonathan Jansen they are watching him could six months back be construed as a serious threat. Remember Essop Pahad and his threats.
But Ms Duarte presides over an ANC that is rack by division and is not even able to tackle the service delivery protests, let alone its tried and tested cadres in the North West. It took the police to rescue a ANC cabinet minister from an ANC mob. Now this women wants to use her muscle or should I say beck against someone who commands more respect that the good lady.
Ms Duarte and the ANC should by now realise that if they want to govern then they should learn to listen to the voices of the Jensen’s of the world otherwise she would end up like Mbeki and his Induna in the dustbin of history.
The ANC and the country has a serious problem at hand. The violent protests is now spreading and the possibility exists that it could grown and if not carefully handled it could destabilize the country. What the ANC cannot afford is to further alienate its supporters, by acting like thugs and bullies. Remember Jimmy Kruger and his bluster just before 1967.
What purpose would it serve to tackle the likes of Jansen when you and I know that what he is saying is the truth. Jensen is not the enemy Jessie. The enemies of progress are those ministers, councilors and civil servants who are not doing their work, nay they busy destabilising the ANC so that they can continue to loot the state coffers. Get serious Jessie.
July 30th, 2009 at 9:27 am
It amazes me that South Africans of goodwill are still trying their best to give the Tripartite Alliance benefit of the doubt. It makes me sad also to be among those who have lost faith on the ANC government. Incompetence is something I was willing to tolerate, knowing very well that black people in the past didn’t get proper educational opportunities; and thought it would improve with time as more and more qualified people came into the picture. What disappoints most with the ANC government is the lack of integrity, that inability to trust what your public representatives. There seem to be a deliberate drive to mislead people with lies and empty rhetoric; things they know they have no will nor ability to implement. That gets my goat. I like your piece very much, which is written, by a gentleman and scholar, from the same frustrated position I am in.
Kind regards
Mphuthumi Ntabeni
July 30th, 2009 at 12:13 pm
Criticism of the ANC is one thing. What the honourable professor tried to do is take his personal feeling on the minister and make them facts. He says the minister is incompetent and lazy but does not give us instances of her incompetence and laziness, so does the writer of this article. You both refer the incident of the court visit. Does this equate to laziness and incompetence? It might reflect badly on her judgement but laziness and incompetence?
The other point which you and the professor seem to shy away from is who you feel should be the Minister of Education. Education in general is in shambles in South Africa should we then conclude that all people in the educational sector are incompetent and lazy? All the provinces have performed poorly in last years Matric results. Which MEC would you then recommend?